Services

Gates over 4,000 means cash for Blues

WANDERERS co-chairman Don Woodward says Blues make money from Wasps playing at Adams Park, as long as the rugby club’s attendances don’t dip below 4,000.

Wasps have confirmed that they will stay in Wycombe for at least another two or three years, although their future after that is uncertain.

However, it appears that it would serve Blues’ cause for them to remain in the town – particularly if their fortunes continue to improve under Dai Young.

Woodward said: “If they have 4,000 [at home games] then it makes it worthwhile for us.

“If they play well and bring lots of people along, then it’s got to be worthwhile for them to stay.”

With season ticket holders not always taking their seats, it’s impossible to know exactly what their gates are, but Wasps’ average home crowd this season is officially 5,249.

That comes from fixtures against London Irish, Worcester, Newport and London Welsh – not exactly the glamour games of the season.

Last season their official average was 6,028 from 16 games, ten of which they lost.

It’s fair to assume that if they improve that record and go some way to re-establishing themselves as a force in the English rugby – and signs are encouraging – gates at Adams Park will improve proportionally.

In their last silverware-winning season, 2007/08, their average attendance in Wycombe was 9,212, including four sell-outs.

Meanwhile, Wanderers’ home crowd of 3,020 against Rochdale last Saturday was their lowest for a weekend League fixture since the club was promoted to the Football League in 1993.

Woodward says that does not set the alarm bells ringing though, and insists there are valid reasons for the low crowd.

Comments

Average gates of 6,028 during last season, Making money if 4,000 or more go to a game?

What would the break even point have been in a 20,000 seater stadium?

Average gates of 6,028 during last season, Making money if 4,000 or more go to a game?
What would the break even point have been in a 20,000 seater stadium?gungun

Average gates of 6,028 during last season, Making money if 4,000 or more go to a game?

What would the break even point have been in a 20,000 seater stadium?

Score: 0

Gerry47
10:21am Fri 16 Nov 12

So does this mean that the money WWFC makes from Wasps is purely from food & drink sales at Wasps matches ? WWFC shouldn't lose any money from WASPS playing at AP even if no one turns up.

The trouble as I see it though, and this is hard to quantify, is that if Wasps are very successful ,riding high in the Premiership, a squad full of internationals then this could actually harm WWFC as people will tend to support the London Rugby team and sponsors would rather associate themselves with Wasps. Therefore WWFC will lose income. Ultimately I think LONDON Wasps at Adams PArk will see the end of WYCOMBE Wanderers FC. But then again I really feel most people in Wycombe couldn't give a hoot about the towns Football team and would rather follow a LONDON Rugby Club.

Oh..and Wasps, please can WWFC have the £400,000 you owe them...thankyou.

So does this mean that the money WWFC makes from Wasps is purely from food & drink sales at Wasps matches ? WWFC shouldn't lose any money from WASPS playing at AP even if no one turns up.
The trouble as I see it though, and this is hard to quantify, is that if Wasps are very successful ,riding high in the Premiership, a squad full of internationals then this could actually harm WWFC as people will tend to support the London Rugby team and sponsors would rather associate themselves with Wasps. Therefore WWFC will lose income. Ultimately I think LONDON Wasps at Adams PArk will see the end of WYCOMBE Wanderers FC. But then again I really feel most people in Wycombe couldn't give a hoot about the towns Football team and would rather follow a LONDON Rugby Club.
Oh..and Wasps, please can WWFC have the £400,000 you owe them...thankyou.Gerry47

So does this mean that the money WWFC makes from Wasps is purely from food & drink sales at Wasps matches ? WWFC shouldn't lose any money from WASPS playing at AP even if no one turns up.

The trouble as I see it though, and this is hard to quantify, is that if Wasps are very successful ,riding high in the Premiership, a squad full of internationals then this could actually harm WWFC as people will tend to support the London Rugby team and sponsors would rather associate themselves with Wasps. Therefore WWFC will lose income. Ultimately I think LONDON Wasps at Adams PArk will see the end of WYCOMBE Wanderers FC. But then again I really feel most people in Wycombe couldn't give a hoot about the towns Football team and would rather follow a LONDON Rugby Club.

Oh..and Wasps, please can WWFC have the £400,000 you owe them...thankyou.

Score: 0

mooneysmagic
12:17pm Fri 16 Nov 12

How can the Trust be even discussing extending Wasps tenure whilst they owe £400k. Wasps are taking advantage of a very weak Trust.

How can the Trust be even discussing extending Wasps tenure whilst they owe £400k. Wasps are taking advantage of a very weak Trust.mooneysmagic

How can the Trust be even discussing extending Wasps tenure whilst they owe £400k. Wasps are taking advantage of a very weak Trust.

Score: 0

cw1989
10:06am Sat 17 Nov 12

We cannot tear up the previous agreement because it has already been signed.

It is welcome that the Trust have been open and told us what the situation is.

The £400k is not lost money and will be handed to us over time, just as we hand money to our creditors over time.

As we were told in the summer many sponsorship deals are combined, so the advertisements around the ground do not change for football or rugby matches. So the Trust cannot clearly state whether or not we receive more money from this.

What does surprise me however is that there appears to not be a rent agreement in place, but as we are making money from Wasps as it is, to try to impose one post signing of the contract is most ungentlemanly and may force them to move.

I think having Wasps in Wycombe is good for the town and good for our club even if it is by a very small margin anything which is a positive must be welcome. With us receiving 3,000 supporters at some games, are we really in a position to complain?

We cannot tear up the previous agreement because it has already been signed.
It is welcome that the Trust have been open and told us what the situation is.
The £400k is not lost money and will be handed to us over time, just as we hand money to our creditors over time.
As we were told in the summer many sponsorship deals are combined, so the advertisements around the ground do not change for football or rugby matches. So the Trust cannot clearly state whether or not we receive more money from this.
What does surprise me however is that there appears to not be a rent agreement in place, but as we are making money from Wasps as it is, to try to impose one post signing of the contract is most ungentlemanly and may force them to move.
I think having Wasps in Wycombe is good for the town and good for our club even if it is by a very small margin anything which is a positive must be welcome. With us receiving 3,000 supporters at some games, are we really in a position to complain?cw1989

We cannot tear up the previous agreement because it has already been signed.

It is welcome that the Trust have been open and told us what the situation is.

The £400k is not lost money and will be handed to us over time, just as we hand money to our creditors over time.

As we were told in the summer many sponsorship deals are combined, so the advertisements around the ground do not change for football or rugby matches. So the Trust cannot clearly state whether or not we receive more money from this.

What does surprise me however is that there appears to not be a rent agreement in place, but as we are making money from Wasps as it is, to try to impose one post signing of the contract is most ungentlemanly and may force them to move.

I think having Wasps in Wycombe is good for the town and good for our club even if it is by a very small margin anything which is a positive must be welcome. With us receiving 3,000 supporters at some games, are we really in a position to complain?

Score: 0

gpn01
5:16pm Sat 17 Nov 12

Think breakeven was around 15,000 for a 17,500 stadium. Which was of concern because the best case optimistic forecast of likely attendance uplift thanks to a new stadium was 14,600.

Think breakeven was around 15,000 for a 17,500 stadium. Which was of concern because the best case optimistic forecast of likely attendance uplift thanks to a new stadium was 14,600.gpn01

Think breakeven was around 15,000 for a 17,500 stadium. Which was of concern because the best case optimistic forecast of likely attendance uplift thanks to a new stadium was 14,600.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here